Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Rambo Tribble writes "Reminding us of beer's pivotal role in the civilization of humankind, the BBC comments on the discovery of an Ancient Egyptian tomb, belonging to the distinguished 'head of beer production' in the Pharaoh's court. From the article: 'Experts say the tomb's wall paintings are well preserved and depict daily life as well as religious rituals. Antiquities Minister Mohamed Ibrahim told the Egyptian al-Ahram newspaper that security had been tightened around the tomb until excavation works are complete.'"

Some Egyptian beer used a yeast that produced huge quantities of tetracycline; enough that it changed the colour of their bones. I wonder if any of the text will refer to the beer's medicinal properties.

A bit of clarification -- it's not the yeast, it's contamination of the grain itself by streptomyces. It would have also led to (much lower) levels in unfermented products like bread or gruel, but fermentation let the production increase tremendously.

It almost definitely isn't. I remember transforming plasmids with parts for tetracycline resistance into bacteria in highschool and I can't imagine that this would be allowed if tetracycline were something that one would want to use as an antibiotic for humans.

Tetracycline family antibiotics are actually very popular for use in humans. Like any antibiotic though resistance is a concern as is making sure the antibiotic in question is effective on the pathogen casuing problems. Tetracyclines tend to be bacteriostatic antibiotics rather than bacteriocidal (so they require use with a functioning immune system to have maximum benefit) which along with their side effect profile makes their use a bit more targeted in practice generally than some other antibiotics.

Probably not. The most likely sources of yeast would have been either spontaneous yeasting, letting natural occurring yeast "contaminate" the wort or by using residue from earlier brews. The yeast as such was not contained because it was unknown that this biological substance was required.It probably is far more likely that this will shed some light on the common ingredients, which seeds were used for the malt, which additives were included (herbs, fruits, nuts) and what (if any) gruit was common. The yeast strains are most likely a reflection of what occurred naturally in that ecosystem. To find out what that could have been like, a paleo ecological study could shed some light on that.

Signed:An archaeologist and beer fanatic (which seems to be a pleonasm)

Have you seen the TV show "Brew Masters?". They did an episode where an expedition was mounted to Egypt, to examine some hieroglyphs at a tomb and capture wild yeast. It was then used to brew "Ta Henket", a limited release one-time brew by Dogfish Head brewery in DE.

The hieroglyphs showed what appeared to be loaves of bread involved in the brewing of beer. One theory is that the ancient brewers put loaves of bread into the wort, inadvertently pitching yeast in the process. The modern brewers attempted to recreate this by baking simple loaves of bread using emmer, a local grain of the time period, then adding the crumbled loaves to the fermenter.

When I watched the show, I was thinking the same thing regarding the baking temperatures killing off the yeast. Surely the presence of wild yeast in the air was critical to the process, even if the ancient brewers didn't know it. If the baking and brewing took place at the same location, there would be enough flour and grain dust in the air to help spread wild yeasts quite well, even without the addition of the finished bread.

"Brew Masters" aired on Discovery Channel a few years ago, and a total of 6 episo

There's something called "wild fermentation", and it's used even today to make old fashioned foods like homemade sauerkraut. When it does is rely on wild fungi that's already on the raw food. You can even make wine with that technique.

It's also a common technique to use a bit of a good fermentation to "seed" the next batch.

If the Egyptians (and this is wild speculation on my part) were consuming a fermented porridge, or even making sou

Just to add - it's also interesting to note that wild fermentation is an important way to preserve food and remove toxic organisms from it. Even the most common, non-alcoholic fermentation (lacto-fermentation), it tends to change the environment of the brew that toxic organisms can't survive. There's actually a history of what was called "small beer" in the west, which was a brew just alcoholic enough to kill off many pathogens. It was safer to drink than water in many areas.

Now consider this in the land of Egypt, where a large population living around one major water source (a river) without modern sewage treatment. It's probably safer to drink a fermented drink than the water directly.

There are two types of 'Germans'. Prussians and Bavarians. Prussians (stereotype: goosestepping, no fun having) are mostly from Germany, Bavarians (stereotype: beer swilling and fat) are mostly from Austria.

There are two types of 'Germans'. Prussians and Bavarians. Prussians (stereotype: goosestepping, no fun having) are mostly from Germany, Bavarians (stereotype: beer swilling and fat) are mostly from Austria.

I've spent some time in Munich, the locals certain don't characterize themselves anything like that. From what they tell me they are Bavarians with German passports. Historically they've been a bit independent and catholic and not quite fitting the classic German stereotypes... and they like it that way.

Please take into account that the beer made hundreds or thousands of years ago had very little alcohol.
Things like enzymes, temperature rests, fermentable extract, FAN and sanitation was unheard of.
Beer wasn't usually being drunk to get drunk. Beer was a more healthy alternative to water, since it contains a number of nutrients and energy, and also being harmless to drink since no known bacteria that's harmful to man can survive in beer.

"no known bacteria that's harmful to man can survive in beer" was what I wrote, and that's true.
Infected beer contains no bacteria that's harmful to humans. It can contain plenty of other bacterias though,
Beer contains alcohol, alfa-acids, very little to no oxygen and co2. The bacteria that likes it there has no reason to like being inside humans.
"Enough alcohol", yes, but it wasn't easy brewing strong beer in those days. Especially considering the bad sanitation.

The only way you make week beer is by starting with low sugar wort. Which is relatively difficult. Too little sugar and fermentation doesn't run right as the yeast is unhappy and gets out-competed. This is especially true for processes that use natural yeast.

The reason beer is relatively sanitary is you boil the wort. Wine at, 12% alcohol has useful antiseptic qualities.

Well if it had very little alcohol, maybe they drank a whole lot of it, plus drank it while consuming other drugs and substances. When I look at that hieroglyph shown in the ad, I'm seeing on the bottom row 3rd from the left what appears to be a guy sporting a HUGE beer gut, plus he has a refer-smoking buddy across standing on the opposite side of the table in front of him. Plus I think those folks bottom right are playing music. Compared to today that matches up pretty accurately to typical college party l

Please take into account that the beer made hundreds or thousands of years ago had very little alcohol.
Things like enzymes, temperature rests, fermentable extract, FAN and sanitation was unheard of.

This sounds like bollocks to me. For starters, we've been distilling for hundred of years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distilled_beverage#History_of_distillation). I'm sure people have been making strong (i.e. easy to get drunk with) beer and wine for centuries. The ancient Greeks reported as much (Google it). You don't need to know what an enzyme is to make an alcoholic beverage. You just need to have figured out the protocol by trial and error. e.g. It's only recently that we've understood what yeast i

Please take into account that the beer made hundreds or thousands of years ago had very little alcoholThat is complete nonsense.Fermentation stops when the yeast can no longer live. Either due to lack of sugar or to an to high alcohol level.So the alcohol level of old bear is mainly limited by the amount of malt/sugar they put into it.There is no historical problem in making a 7% vol alcohol beer.

and also being harmless to drink since no known bacteria that's harmful to man can survive in beer.That is nons

Most bacteria that make you sick can easy survive in beer. But they can not get into a closed bottle;DDuring brewing (several repeated heatings), the bacteria already in it get killed. Afterwards the matter is how sterile you can keep the beer.

The ration for an pyramid labourer included a measure of beer although supervisors got to have jugs. The only reason the Giza pyramids were built is because everyone was totally blitzed. Interestingly enough, beer is often seen in modern pyramid structures. [wikipedia.org]